fire was started

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "fire was started" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used to describe the initiation of a fire, often in contexts related to investigations, reports, or narratives about incidents involving fire. Example: "The investigation revealed that the fire was started deliberately in the abandoned warehouse."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Science

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

58 human-written examples

They believe the fire was started deliberately.

Independent

"The fire was started apparently to cover up the crime".

The New York Times

It is not clear how the fire was started.

The New York Times

Investigators believe that fire was started by pyrotechnics.

The New York Times

Fire officials said the fire was started intentionally.

The New York Times

The University fire was started shortly after noon by three incendiary bomb explosions.

The New York Times

Soon, the ship began to take on water, and the fire was started to attract attention.

The New York Times

The fire was started by candles left unattended on the first floor of the house.

The New Yorker

According to Xinhua, the fire was started by unlicensed welders and four people have been detained.

The New York Times

Investigators believe the fire was started with some sort of accelerant, the police said.

The New York Times

Investigators are looking into whether the fire was started by a worker smoking, an official said.

The New York Times

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When reporting on incidents, use "fire was started" to objectively describe how a fire began, especially when the cause is known or under investigation. For instance: "The investigation revealed the "fire was started" by faulty wiring."

Common error

Avoid using "fire was started" when you actually mean the fire spread. Starting refers to the origin, while spreading refers to the fire's subsequent expansion. Misusing the phrase can cause confusion about the initial cause versus the consequences.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "fire was started" functions as a passive construction, indicating the beginning of a fire event. Ludwig examples show its common usage in describing incidents where the cause is under investigation or already determined, aligning with Ludwig AI's assessment of its correctness.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

70%

Science

15%

Wiki

5%

Less common in

Formal & Business

3%

Encyclopedias

2%

Social Media

1%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, the phrase "fire was started" is a grammatically sound and widely used passive construction, primarily employed in news and media to report the initiation of fire incidents. Ludwig AI confirms its correctness and usability. While it's a common phrase, awareness of potential errors, like confusing "started" with "spread", can enhance clarity. Alternative phrases like "fire broke out" or "fire ignited" may be appropriate depending on the specific context. Understanding the grammatical function and register helps ensure accurate and effective communication.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

fire was ignited

Focuses on the action of igniting.

fire began

A simple and direct way to express the start of a fire.

fire was set

Indicates deliberate initiation of the fire.

fire broke out

Focuses on the sudden commencement of a fire, without specifying the cause.

fire ignited

Emphasizes the action of setting something on fire.

fire erupted

Suggests a sudden and forceful start to a fire.

fire commenced

A more formal way of saying a fire began.

origin of the fire

Emphasizes the starting point or source of the fire.

cause of the fire

Focuses on the reason a fire started.

ignition source

Highlights the element that caused the fire to start.

FAQs

What can I say instead of "fire was started"?

You can use alternatives like "fire broke out", "fire ignited", or "fire began" depending on the context.

Is it correct to say "the fire was started by"?

Yes, "the fire was started by" is grammatically correct and commonly used to indicate the cause or origin of a fire. For example, "The fire was started by a faulty electrical wire."

What is the difference between "the fire was started" and "the fire started"?

"The fire was started" is in the passive voice, emphasizing the action rather than the actor. "The fire started" is in the active voice, simply stating that the fire began. The passive construction is often used when the cause or agent is unknown or less important than the event itself.

Can "fire was started" be used in formal writing?

Yes, "fire was started" is appropriate for formal writing, particularly in investigative reports, news articles, and official documents concerning fire incidents.